Newspaper Articles-Bonneville Unit of the CUP, Letter from Howard Hawkins, Mayor of Covina

PROVO, UTAH, THURSDAY, SEpXEMBER 21,1972 .
On Environmental Impact
Bonneville Unit Hearings Set
The Bonneville Unit of the
Central Utah Project will be the
su~ject of environmental impact
hearings Friday and Saturday in
Orem where, it is anticipated,
some opposition to the project
will be raised.
The sessions are scheduled
Friday starting at 2 p.m. and
Saturday at 9 a.m. at the Orem
High School Auditorium, 175 W.
400 E.
The unit has been in the plan­ning
stage many years, and was
already under construction when
the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 became law
and the Bonneville unit was re­quired
to prepare an impact
statement.
The report, in the draft stage,
covers 285 pages and testimony
received in oral form at hearings
this weekend, together with
written testimony sent to the
Bureau of Reclamation' will be
What is the Central Utah
Project? More particularly,
what is the CUP's Bonneville
Unit on which environmental
impact hearings are .set
Friday and Saturday. As a
public service, the Herald has
prepared articles, appearing
on Page 7, explaining the
project. Today's Issue also
includes an editorial ex­pressing
opinions on impor­tance
of the hearings and of
the project.
added to the statement for
review by the Council on En-vironmental
Quali ty in
Washington.
Three major : features of the
project are underway, the Jor­dan
Aqueduct which is 50 per
cent complete; tHe Soldier Creek
Dam, which is 85 or 90 per cent
complete, and the Currant and
Layout Tunnels which are 60 per
cent complete.
Three contracts were
scheduled to be let in February
of this year, and funds have been
appropriated for them, but the
environmental hearing hai
delayed their being let and
Bureau of Reclamation
spokesmen feel that those pro­jects
may be delayed for more
than a year. The projects in­volved
are the Currant Creek
Dam, the Vat Tunnel, and the
Stillwater Tunnel.
These featuers .are needed to
provide water to fill the enlarged
Strawberry Reservoir which is
nearing completion.
The Bureau of Reclamation's
draft environmental statement
concentrates on the Strawberry
Aqueduct Collection system and
the Jordan Aqueduct. Other
features of the .project, still in
the future, have not been
developed in as much detail as
yet.
Spokesmen for the Bureau of
Reclamation and the Central
Utah Water Conservancy
District have expressed concern
at opposition which has
developed concerning the pro-
. (Continued On Page 2)
Bonneville Unit
",' . (Continued From ge 1) .
ject. Some foes have i~di~ted a
desire to stop the proJect.
. Over 100 persons will make
oral presentations at tge hearing
and if there is time at the end
. Saturday any others will be
, heard who wish to speak.
Written testimony may be sent
to the regional director of the
Bureau of Reclamation at P.O.
Box 11568, Salt Lake Cit ~h,
84111 before Oct. 5. -
, I
Utah .Nee·ds CUP
Approval by the House Appropriations Committee of a large
public works bill containing $29.4 milliQD for the Central Utah 'Proj­ect
(CUP) 'hopefully signals an end to unrealistically low federal
funding of this vital project
Jus1' last September, Sen. WaD3.ce F. Beimett, R:.Utah, justifi-·
ably complained that due to an inadequate spending program, only
10 per cent of the project had been completed since it was started
in 1965. He charged that at the low rate of federal spending, "it
would. take 69 years to complete the water re<:lamation project.
However, the $29.4 million is the largest amount ever allowec.l
by the committee for CUP. H the bill is passed by Congress; it will
enable completion of various projects whose funds were scheduled
to run out at the end of fiscal 1972.
Last. April, the House approved a bill authorizing some $184
million for CUP over a five-year period. The authorization would
carry the project through 1977, at which ·time an additional $171"
million in"new authorizations will be needed to co~plete It
The Senate, on May 9, passed a measure inqreasing the spend~
ing on the Upper Colorado River Basin Project by $610 million,
enough to 'finish the project, including the CUP. But, both of these
bills must be combined in a compromise plan by a joint conference
committee.
In the meantime, CongreSs should waste no time in passing the
public works bill. The CUP project is vital if Utah is to have suffi­cient
water to meet rapidly increasing population and industrial
demands projected over the nell1 few years. .
. Moreover, continued funding of the CUP project will mean an
improved employment picture in an area which bas been heavily
hit by unemployment and economic depreSSion .
. . Water is the life-blood of Utah. The state simply can't afford to'
run short, and the CUP .prDject is one way of making sure it
doesn't
MOlatQrium
Soughton
CUP Work
SALT LAKE CITY (UPI) -
The Southwest Regional Con­servation
Committee has joined
the Unita Chapter of the Sier­ra
Club in calling for a mora­torium
on the Central Utah
Project (CUP).
The committee adopted a
Uinta Chapter resolution calling
for a halt to all construction or
authorization of funds until citi­zens
are informed of "the na­ture
and costs" of the project,
the CUP's environmental im­pact
is completely evaluated
and the entire justification for
the project is re-evaluated.
The resolution claims the
CUP "will produce severe en­vironmental
imp a .c t on the
streams and wildlife of the Uni­ta
Mountains," that it will "re­sult
in severe degradation of
162 miles of valuable trout
streams in the Bonneville Unit
alone," and that it will reduce
Utah Lake by one-third its pres­ent
size and "destroy the most
valuable warm - water fishery
in Utah."
The statement also claims
there has been a total lack of
studies of the CUP's environ­mental
impact, and that the
federal Bureau of Reclama­tion's
preliminary environmen­tal
review of the Bonneville
Unit is "nothing more than an
attempt to justify the projec~.1'
The Bonneville Unit is about
15 per cent complete, and is
the largest authorized segment
of the CUP. It is aimed at de­veloping
additional water re­sources
for the Uinta and Bon­neville
Basins.
The Bureau of Reclamation is
scheduled to begin hf'Mings on
the Bonneville Unit's environ­mental
impact Sept. 22 in
Orem.
Officials Air Aspects
Of Bonneville Unit
At Meeting in Provo
By ROBERT MCDOUGALL
The Bonneville Unit of the
Central Utah Project was the
subject of discussion at.a
meeting of the Sierra Club m
Provo Wednesday.
Representatives from the
Bureau of Reclamation, the U.S.
Forest Service, and the Depart­ment
of Wildlife Resources
answered questions of about 15
Sierra club members.
Club members expressed con­cern
over the impact of the
project on wilf life, recreation
and the environment.
. Boyle Speaks
U.S. Forest Service represen­tative
Elmer P. Boyle explained
that planners of the project have
cooperated with the Forest Ser­vice
in relocating certain roads,
modifying projects, and even
abandoning some to prevent en­vironmental
damage as studies
were made which detected possi­ble
hazards.
He explained that !f1 per cent
of water generated m the Cen­tral
Utah Project is from land
under the jurisdiction of the
U.S.Forest project is from land
under the jurisdiction of the U.S.
Forest Service. He said that the
(Continued On Page 2)
Officials Air Proiect
(Continued From Page 1)
service was charged with the
responsibility of maintaining.
habitats for wildlife on those
lands in conjunction with any
development that might be
planned.
Project Need
Grant Lamb, an engineer With
I the Bureau of Reclamation,
presented arguments to
demonstrate the need of the
Bonneville Unit of the project.
He said that it was projected
that while the population on the
Wasatch Front is expected to
double in the next 40 years, the
water consumption is expected
to increase ten times.
He explained that 87 per cent
of water generated in the cen­tral
Utah Project is from land
under the jurisdiction of the U.S.
Forest Service. He said the ser­vice
was charged w'ith the
responsibility of maintaining
proper habitats for wildlife on
those lands in conjunction with
any development that might be
planned.
Project Need
Grant Lamb, and engineer
with the Bureau of Reclamation,
presented arguments to
demonstrate the need of the
Bonneville Unit 01 the project.
He said that it was projected
that while the population on the
Wasatch Front is expected to
double in the next 40 years, the
water consumption is expected
to increase ten times.
He explained that all but nine
per cent of the cost of the project
would be repaid to the federal .
treasury from revenues
generated by the water from
electricity, irrigation, domestic
and industrial sales.
The State of Utah has water
rights to about 22 percent of the
upper Colorado River water, but
only a small fraction of that
water is presently being used.
He expiained that the purpose
of the project is to bring water
from the population sparce but
water rich upper Colorado River
basin lands in the Uinta Basin
area to the population rich but
water sparce Wasatch Front.
Rainfall Pict1lre
Rainfall on the W .. teb Front
where most of the state's popula­tion
is concentrated is about 16
inches- a year. Rainfall in the
Uinta mountains is about 80 in­ches,
mostly in snow fall, Mr.
Lamb explained.
Sierra club members asked
questions abou proposals to dike
Provo Bay, and Goshen Bay and
asked about the fate of wildlife
in the area and whether recrea­tion
areas would be maintained,
or would they be used for in­dustrial
development.
Officials replied that those
questions would have to be
answered by the public. These
projects are 10 years away, they
said, and residents affected
would have to decide how to use
these areas.
An environmental hearing is
scheduled for Sept. 22 and 23 to
air the issues and to hear public
comment on the project.
A draft statement by the
Bureau of Reclamation on
Bonneville Unit's likely effects
011 the environmellt is noW being
circulated. A copy is available at
the Provo Public Library and
from commercial sources, ac­cording
to Mr. Lamb.
Morton Views
By GORDON WHITE
Deseret News Washington
Correspondent
WASHINGTON-The defeat
of Rep. Wayne N. Aspinall,
D-Colo.. the chairman of the
House Intetior Committee. by
an environmentalist.. in the
Colorado ptimary election.
may make senior members of
Congress more sympathetic to
environmenta~ concerns. At
least that was the straight­faced
suggestion of Interior
Secretary Rogers C. B. Mor­ton
at a press conference this
morning.
Morton had been asked if he
thought a Big Cypress. Flori­da.
Park Bill stood anV better
chanl'C now. It has been
opposed by Rep. James Haley.
D-Fla.. who is in line to suc­ceed
Aspinall as Intetior Com­mittee
chairman.
Morton said earlier that
Aspinall had been a close per­sunal
ftiend of his, and a man
who gave great public service.
"The country is far better off
for his having served," Morton
added, noting that "we dId
occasionally have our dis­agreements
...
Morton served on Aspinall 's
committee before becoming
Intetior secretary in 1970.
Most of Secretary Morton's
press conference was devoted
to an !lO-million-acre land
withdrawal in Alaska, made
by Morton under the Alaska
Native Claims Act.
"It is too bad we did not
have the opportunity to' set up
the land use patterns of other
Western states the way we
can in Alaska, Morton said.
"We have ttied very had to
safeguard forest lands. the
claims of the natives, potential
wild and scenic. rjvers, while
giving the people de Alaska the
wherewithall to ha
economically viable st
Secretary Morton
when Utah, for exam
admitted to the union,
tern of allocating s tered
land sections to the sta
tD the railroads and 0
terests haphazardly orced
Utah into an uneconomi land
use pattern and limited the
economic development Ir the
state.
"What 'we have is h ings
of alternate sections, ev­eryone
afraid to give up any­thing
because there mig}/t be
gold in them thar hills. SO you
have a voluntary land fr ze."
national parks. wilderness ;!nn - ---------'--- .....
· .
II Defeof
secretary said, in an­another
question, that
elilectl~ a House-Senat ..
the Glen Can­area
bill to
road authOrization, or WIth
only a study. The state has
fought for clear directives for
a road between BulHrog Basin
and Glen Canyon City, against
strong conservationist opposi­tion.
CIT Y o F COVINA
12!S EAST COLLEGE STREET • COVINA. CALIFORNIA 91722 • 331-0111
: [ · C t: tVED
1!1l'l8R - CtJ1I'I!)I
September 22, 1972 SEP" 26 '72
, I
Inili~ - COde. I
Mr. Palmer DeLong
Bureau of Reclamation
P. O. BOX 11568
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
Dear Palmer:
I want to thank you personally for the fine tour of the
Central Utah Project last week.
We think we do water projects in a big way in California,
but I think your project is more intensive and goes to
greater effort to get the limited water supply you can
collect from the mountains and transport it to the populated
plains.
Thank you for letting me come in place of Mr. Joe Jensen and
I will remember it for a long time.
Sincerely,
Howard H. Hawkins
Mayor
City of Covina
//--!:...L-~:::'-"'If-w~~1 ____ ~-----.----_I
AM'd.

Click tabs to swap between content that is broken into logical sections.

PROVO, UTAH, THURSDAY, SEpXEMBER 21,1972 .
On Environmental Impact
Bonneville Unit Hearings Set
The Bonneville Unit of the
Central Utah Project will be the
su~ject of environmental impact
hearings Friday and Saturday in
Orem where, it is anticipated,
some opposition to the project
will be raised.
The sessions are scheduled
Friday starting at 2 p.m. and
Saturday at 9 a.m. at the Orem
High School Auditorium, 175 W.
400 E.
The unit has been in the plan­ning
stage many years, and was
already under construction when
the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 became law
and the Bonneville unit was re­quired
to prepare an impact
statement.
The report, in the draft stage,
covers 285 pages and testimony
received in oral form at hearings
this weekend, together with
written testimony sent to the
Bureau of Reclamation' will be
What is the Central Utah
Project? More particularly,
what is the CUP's Bonneville
Unit on which environmental
impact hearings are .set
Friday and Saturday. As a
public service, the Herald has
prepared articles, appearing
on Page 7, explaining the
project. Today's Issue also
includes an editorial ex­pressing
opinions on impor­tance
of the hearings and of
the project.
added to the statement for
review by the Council on En-vironmental
Quali ty in
Washington.
Three major : features of the
project are underway, the Jor­dan
Aqueduct which is 50 per
cent complete; tHe Soldier Creek
Dam, which is 85 or 90 per cent
complete, and the Currant and
Layout Tunnels which are 60 per
cent complete.
Three contracts were
scheduled to be let in February
of this year, and funds have been
appropriated for them, but the
environmental hearing hai
delayed their being let and
Bureau of Reclamation
spokesmen feel that those pro­jects
may be delayed for more
than a year. The projects in­volved
are the Currant Creek
Dam, the Vat Tunnel, and the
Stillwater Tunnel.
These featuers .are needed to
provide water to fill the enlarged
Strawberry Reservoir which is
nearing completion.
The Bureau of Reclamation's
draft environmental statement
concentrates on the Strawberry
Aqueduct Collection system and
the Jordan Aqueduct. Other
features of the .project, still in
the future, have not been
developed in as much detail as
yet.
Spokesmen for the Bureau of
Reclamation and the Central
Utah Water Conservancy
District have expressed concern
at opposition which has
developed concerning the pro-
. (Continued On Page 2)
Bonneville Unit
",' . (Continued From ge 1) .
ject. Some foes have i~di~ted a
desire to stop the proJect.
. Over 100 persons will make
oral presentations at tge hearing
and if there is time at the end
. Saturday any others will be
, heard who wish to speak.
Written testimony may be sent
to the regional director of the
Bureau of Reclamation at P.O.
Box 11568, Salt Lake Cit ~h,
84111 before Oct. 5. -
, I
Utah .Nee·ds CUP
Approval by the House Appropriations Committee of a large
public works bill containing $29.4 milliQD for the Central Utah 'Proj­ect
(CUP) 'hopefully signals an end to unrealistically low federal
funding of this vital project
Jus1' last September, Sen. WaD3.ce F. Beimett, R:.Utah, justifi-·
ably complained that due to an inadequate spending program, only
10 per cent of the project had been completed since it was started
in 1965. He charged that at the low rate of federal spending, "it
would. take 69 years to complete the water re